The solution to prevent such an occurrence again, suggested one councilor, was to adopt an ordinance requiring “companies to seek a permit and conduct background for all employees before distributing fliers in town.”

That might work because no company could comply without making the activity either too expensive or too risky. However, effectively banning the distribution of fliers might be constitutionally defective.

Also, think of it more. How many options do the homeless in Braintree have to answer calls of nature? Could the man have gotten relief by knocking on a door and asking to use the facilities inside? Who among us would let him in? Rather than being outraged by being witness to what every living animal must do, the outrage should be directed at the lack of facilities in neighborhoods or the prevalence of homelessness in our communities.

The man apparently tried to be out of public view, but for a chance glance out a window he would have succeeded and done no more wrong than a dog owner who does not clean up after his friend. How often does this occur?

Probably more often than we know, but, if it is not a problem worth attacking its underlying causes, then don’t add to the criminal code.